MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410604500 · doi:10.1017/asb.2025.14

Assessing driving risk through unsupervised detection of anomalies in telematics time series data

2025· article· en· W4410604500 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian Weng Chan, Andrei L. Badescu, X. Sheldon Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueAstin Bulletin · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTelematicsSeries (stratigraphy)Computer scienceEconometricsEconomicsTelecommunicationsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Vehicle telematics provides granular data for dynamic driving risk assessment, but current methods often rely on aggregated metrics (e.g., harsh braking counts) and do not fully exploit the rich time-series structure of telematics data. In this paper, we introduce a flexible framework using continuous-time hidden Markov model (CTHMM) to model and analyse trip-level telematics data. Unlike existing methods, the CTHMM models raw time-series data without predefined thresholds on harsh driving events or assumptions about accident probabilities. Moreover, our analysis is based solely on telematics data, requiring no traditional covariates such as driver or vehicle characteristics. Through unsupervised anomaly detection based on pseudo-residuals, we identify deviations from normal driving patterns—defined as the prevalent behaviour observed in a driver’s history or across the population—which are linked to accident risk. Validated on both controlled and real-world datasets, the CTHMM effectively detects abnormal driving behaviour and trips with increased accident likelihood. In real data analysis, higher anomaly levels in longitudinal and lateral accelerations consistently correlate with greater accident risk, with classification models using this information achieving ROC-AUC values as high as 0.86 for trip-level analysis and 0.78 for distinguishing drivers with claims. Furthermore, the methodology reveals significant behavioural differences between drivers with and without claims, offering valuable insights for insurance applications, accident analysis, and prevention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstin BulletinSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207